Do I need radar to cross the channel?

[boatmike]

Don't know how true this is but I was told by an electronics supplier who is also a friend that BB radar is excellent for close'ish work but not so good at long range and that HD radar was probably a better all-rounder. I went for 4kw HD radar and fitted class b ais transceiver at the same time. I am suitably impressed with the radar and on the occasions it has worked with the ais also. I have suffered 2 failed ais units, the manufacturer has now given me the next model up so not sure if there was an underlying problem with the original units time will tell I guess.

Martin

I get the impression that you are correct Martin. All the publicity blurb that I have read suggests that so called "broadband radar" is great for very short range and uses very low power which is good. In fact there are many examples where the blurb looks at finding a vacant berth in a marina or avoiding other vessels in a crowded anchorage...... Frankly I am more interested in avoiding being run down by a tanker in shipping lanes though so will stick to conventional proven technology until I see first hand that this BB thing works as well as a conventional radar at 3 miles plus. I agree that AIS is a superb adjunct to radar but does not replace it. If I manage to find my way in to a marina or anchorage that's job done as far as radar is concerned and I am happy to use Mk 1 eyeball to find an empty berth! Also while conventional radar is power hungry, which might be important on a sailing vessel, it's not so much of a consideration on a motorboat or even a sailboat under power.

 

[hlb]

Thanks for asking as I am most grateful for the quantity and quality of advice received.
It seems that radar is a very good thing from a safety point of view but it needs to be learnt to make any use of it. Fog, whilst it can be forecast, also seems to be unpredictable and I would not wish to be caught in it. Even with all this technology it seems a leap of faith would be required to put one's trust in a 7" display!
I would also be inclined to augment radar with AIS as the latter should help clarify the former.
Broadband radar looks like the best option. I would expect to be able to clearly see potential dangers a few miles away which is where Broadband is strong. It appears that the greater definition offered by Bb would make it easier to interpret.
It looks like I should flash the cash and get learning before I need to use it in anger especially as I anticipate going further afield so its use will surely be needed one day!
Broadband or pulse what do you think?

Even with quite an old radar like mine, it's not hard to pick up the basics of radar, especially if your main concern is ships, or other boats. They are just blobs on the screen and the circles on the screen tells you roughly how far they are away, by watching them on the screen, you can tell which way they are going, in relation to you. Yes, there are many more usefull functions of radar, which may take a bit longer to master, but they are mostly nice to have extras, the basics will keep you out of danger, without much learning.

AIS is just a nice to have gimmick. Does it really matter what the name of the ship was, that hit you!!

Radar is far harder to interpret, when looking at land, for reasons that I am not about to go into here, but for ships, hardly any training is needed, just fit it and go out on a good day, find targets through the window and you will see them on the screen.

I bought radar after a scary trip in thick fog and only an iffy Deca fix, every now and then. That radar bought in the late 80's, was excelent and all you need and yes you can trust your self to a 7" screen.

Radar is also a massive backup to GPS or Chart plotter. If you think you are two miles off an island for instance, but cant see it because of fog. The radar will confirm it, or not, on a completely different type of system.

I am not saying that you cannot go without it. but unlike SR's sailing boat, you can not just hang about for a day or two, hoping the fog will clear, or running out of fuel would be your next problem.

 

[Hurricane]

Even with quite an old radar like mine, it's not hard to pick up the basics of radar, especially if your main concern is ships, or other boats. They are just blobs on the screen and the circles on the screen tells you roughly how far they are away, by watching them on the screen, you can tell which way they are going, in relation to you. Yes, there are many more usefull functions of radar, which may take a bit longer to master, but they are mostly nice to have extras, the basics will keep you out of danger, without much learning.

AIS is just a nice to have gimmick. Does it really matter what the name of the ship was, that hit you!!

Radar is far harder to interpret, when looking at land, for reasons that I am not about to go into here, but for ships, hardly any training is needed, just fit it and go out on a good day, find targets through the window and you will see them on the screen.

I bought radar after a scary trip in thick fog and only an iffy Deca fix, every now and then. That radar bought in the late 80's, was excelent and all you need and yes you can trust your self to a 7" screen.

Radar is also a massive backup to GPS or Chart plotter. If you think you are two miles off an island for instance, but cant see it because of fog. The radar will confirm it, or not, on a completely different type of system.

I am not saying that you cannot go without it. but unlike SR's sailing boat, you can not just hang about for a day or two, hoping the fog will clear, or running out of fuel would be your next problem.

Yep - 100% agree with you, Haydn

Some of the comments on this thread about how to use radar are "beggar’s belief".
As you said right at the beginning its NOT rocket science.
It’s as simple as switching on your home TV
Stick it on "head up" and its just like looking out of the window.

OK, to use radar as a nav aid it's a little more complicated but as collision avoidance it's really child’s play.

Searush - you obviously haven't used a modern one.
By modern I mean in the last 12 years!!

 

[MapisM]

It’s as simple as switching on your home TV
Stick it on "head up" and its just like looking out of the window.

Well, yeah, and if you do that in glorious sunshine or in a full moon night, it's even better if you actually DO look out of the window...!

It seems to me that anyone who says that interpreting a radar screen is a child's play, never used one in conditions where understanding exactly what the screen shows can make the difference between staying afloat or not.

 

[hlb]

Thanks for asking as I am most grateful for the quantity and quality of advice received.
It seems that radar is a very good thing from a safety point of view but it needs to be learnt to make any use of it. Fog, whilst it can be forecast, also seems to be unpredictable and I would not wish to be caught in it. Even with all this technology it seems a leap of faith would be required to put one's trust in a 7" display!
I would also be inclined to augment radar with AIS as the latter should help clarify the former.
Broadband radar looks like the best option. I would expect to be able to clearly see potential dangers a few miles away which is where Broadband is strong. It appears that the greater definition offered by Bb would make it easier to interpret.
It looks like I should flash the cash and get learning before I need to use it in anger especially as I anticipate going further afield so its use will surely be needed one day!
Broadband or pulse what do you think?

You do not need broad band, just a basic set. The first time I used radar, was just after it was fitted, I dont think I had read the book or anything. I was crossing from Wales to Ireland, this was before chart plotters, just a rough GPS fix. There was good visibility. But I had the radar on for practice.

The radio comes on and says. We are the seismic survey vessel ******, towing six miles of cable, will the mobo ahead please respond and tell us your destination. Wife panicked like hell.

But I'd watched on my radar screen and seen that we were about nine miles ahead of this vessel and had already passed it's bows. So realised there was no danger, so I wound the guy up a bit, by telling him that we were a bit new to radar and could he help!! This did not go down very well with the EX. Thing was, I'd been looking at him for about an hour or so on radar and he'd not seen us till we had passed him.. Secret is, many "Professional" sailors are not all on watch most of the time. So it's us amateurs have to sort the job out most of the time.

Radar is quite fantastic, but you only need it a bit of the time, yet it can be very usefull when you think you have full visability, but yet you have not. It's quite fantastic at measuring distance.

GPS is great, but it wont tell you where this ship is, radar will.

 

[boatmike]

Well, yeah, and if you do that in glorious sunshine or in a full moon night, it's even better if you actually DO look out of the window...!

It seems to me that anyone who says that interpreting a radar screen is a child's play, never used one in conditions where understanding exactly what the screen shows can make the difference between staying afloat or not.

I agree entirely. When looking at other ships that are moving RELATIVE to you the most common mistake is assuming the plot gives an indication of their actual course and this is important to know the avoiding action to take an accordance with colregs in many cases. I agree that it is not rocket science, but turn on the TV and take the obvious action can be a disaster. That's in fact where "radar assisted collisions" come from.

I am reminded of the old adage. Nobody ever went aground because they were unsure of their position. Most are absolutely sure and are wrong!

 

[KevB]

I've had current boat for 10 years, crossed the channel regularly. Run over 1000 hours and never needed the use of a radar. No you don't need one.

 

[oldgit]

If you have a few quid lying around can think of a lot worse boaty things to spend it on than a basic radar set up.It has been very useful to me even in some of the narrow and confined creeks of the Medway and in combination with a radio watch can let you know what else is around.

 

[Searush]

(snip)

Searush - you obviously haven't used a modern one.
By modern I mean in the last 12 years!!

Actually, I have never used one at all in 50 years of pottering on boats. In that time I have sailed on the Mersey, Irish Sea, N Wales, Anglesey, Channel coast & crossings, Clyde & W of Scotland plus various inland waters.

Only twice have I felt that radar would be handy. Once in fog leaving Holyhead for Ireland as the Ferry was incoming (I simply stayed close to the cliffs!) & once entering the Menai Strait thro Puffin sound on a moonless night after a tiring trip back from the IoM.

So, yeah radar is a good thing, but it is NOT NECESSARY for a channel crossing.

 

[DougH]

I've had current boat for 10 years, crossed the channel regularly. Run over 1000 hours and never needed the use of a radar. No you don't need one.

So you don't know what you are missing.

Rather like saying that your house has stood for 250 years, that means it could fall down tomorrow.

 

[dabsolute470]

Searust

if you have never had radar how can you comment, please leave the comments to people who know a bit about boating.

 

[DougH]

Searust

if you have never had radar how can you comment, please leave the comments to people who know a bit about boating.

As we are all aware Searush likes to live his life utilising only the most basic pleasures and to reject anything that other people may find rewarding.

He cannot understand that the wishes of other people on this planet do not wish to conform to his misguided ideals.

However both Searush and other posters are perfectly entitled not to use radar and that is their loss.

In the mean time the rest of us can continue to charge around burning millions of litres of fuel making life intolerable to those of a small minded nature in a safe manner possibly because of the assistance our nice radar installation.

 

[neale]

Do you need it? No.

Would it be nice to have? Yes

Will you wish to god you had it if you get caught out in fog? Yes

This is on the basis of many many Channel crossings with and without radar, in everything from Good visibility to a real pea souper.

 

[Searush]

Searust

if you have never had radar how can you comment, please leave the comments to people who know a bit about boating.

The question was "Is it necessary?" Millions have crossed the channel without it - so it clearly isn't necessary. Yes it's nice to have & if I had a few grand to throw at it I might consider it.

But NECESSARY? You have to be taking the P if your skills are not up to a simple channel crossing without radar!

I'm sorry my basic level of boating as a pensioner offends some, but I don't really understand why you feel the need to disrespect someone who can manage without all the expensive stuff you seem to consider "necessary" to leave the marina!

Incidentally, I am perfectly willing to accept a set as a gift if someone wishes to spend a couple of grand on installing a set in my boat. Who knows, I may even use it occasionally.

 

[timbartlett]

...OK, to use radar as a nav aid it's a little more complicated but as collision avoidance it's really child’s play....

I expect the skipper of Wahkuna thought much the same:
http://www.maib.gov.uk/cms_resources/nedlloyd vespucci and wahkuna.pdf

SYNOPSIS
At 1100 UTC on 28 May 2003, the container vessel P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci and the yacht Wahkuna collided in the English Channel in poor visibility. The MAIB was notified of the accident on 29 May, and an investigation started on the same day.

Each vessel had detected the other by radar when at a range of about 6 miles. The container ship was on a course of 255°(T) at a speed of 25 knots. The yacht was on the port bow of the container ship on a course of 012° (C) at a speed of 7.5 knots, and was due to pass about 8 cables ahead of the container ship.

The skipper of the yacht, however, incorrectly estimated from his radar display that P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci was passing 1.5 miles ahead of Wahkuna, and reduced speed by disengaging his engine. This action, which also resulted in a substantial alteration in the yacht's heading as it lost steerage, put the two vessels on a collision course. The actions of the yacht, the CPA of which now appeared as 2 cables to port on ARPA, concerned and confused the master of P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci, but he was reluctant to take any manoeuvring action because he was uncertain of what the yacht would do next.

Minutes later, the vessels collided and the bulbous bow of P&O Nedlloyd Vespucci struck the forward part of Wahkuna's hull, demolishing the first 3m of her hull and dismasting her. Despite having sent a lookout to the port bridge wing, the master of the container ship was not aware that a collision had occurred, and continued on passage. The yacht crew had to abandon to a liferaft, where they stayed for 5.5 hours before being rescued.

Several factors contributed to the accident including:
• Misunderstanding by Wahkuna's skipper of which of the Collision Regulations are applicable in fog.
• Over-confidence in the accuracy of ARPA by the master of the container ship
• Acceptance by the master of the container ship of a small passing distance
• The inability of the yacht skipper to use radar effectively
• The failure of both vessels to keep an effective radar lookout
• The high speed of the container vessel
• Poor bridge resource management.

A recommendation has been reiterated to the MCA with regard to the issue of guidance to assist in determining a safe speed in restricted visibility.
Recommendations have also been made to the Royal Yachting Association and the British Marine Federation with a view to improving radar knowledge among yachtsmen. The manufacturer of the locating beacon has been advised to check new and existing beacons for similar faults.

The colouring is mine: The blue bit is pertinent to this thread. The red bit is pertinent to the (frequent) discussions about whether it is "common sense" for pleasure craft to make up their own colregs as they go along.

 

[Poignard]

The only time I really wished I had it was when I stupidly decided to ignore a weather forecast warning of mist 'patches' when returning from Cherbourg to the Solent. Going blind through a 10 mile wide mist 'patch' across the southwest-going lane south of the Isle of Wight was an experience I don't want to repeat.

If I was going to make a habit of going amongst shipping in bad visibility, I would buy a radar set. As I'm not, I'll pay more attention to forecasts.

 

[DAKA]

I've had current boat for 10 years, crossed the channel regularly. Run over 1000 hours and never needed the use of a radar. No you don't need one.

Agreeing with KevB.

Radar not needed.
If fog is forecast , delay the trip as you would if a GF8 was forecast.

To be honest even with Radar I expect most pleasure boaters would delay a trip if fog was forecast which makes them even more of a red herring , save your money spend it on fuel !

 

[DougH]

The question was "Is it necessary?" Millions have crossed the channel without it - so it clearly isn't necessary. Yes it's nice to have & if I had a few grand to throw at it I might consider it.

But NECESSARY? You have to be taking the P if your skills are not up to a simple channel crossing without radar!

I'm sorry my basic level of boating as a pensioner offends some, but I don't really understand why you feel the need to disrespect someone who can manage without all the expensive stuff you seem to consider "necessary" to leave the marina.

Searush, it's only you that is using the word NECESSARY.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone on this forum is offended by your 'basic level of boating as a pensioner'. (I am also a pensioner )

It seems to many on this forum that we offend YOU as we do not conform to your ideals.

Each to their own and remember that this thread is about Radar.

Over the last few months you have appeared to have adopted a more lighthearted approach so why not continue in that vein.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

After my first experience, I would not go to sea without it. Having said that, there is only once or maybe twice a year I've needed it. Bit like fog lights, you dont need them either, humm, till there is fog.

Agree with that entirely. Many years ago, early in our boating life, we made a Channel crossing in our non radar equipped Sealine 305 at the same time of year as the OP is proposing (ie May) and we met a thick fog bank in the shipping lanes on the way back. It was one of the most unnerving experiences of my life and I've never owned a boat without a radar since. Modern radars are not difficult to operate since auto tune came long and IMHO are an essential bit of kit on any cruising boat

 

[MapisM]

The red bit is pertinent to the (frequent) discussions about whether it is "common sense" for pleasure craft to make up their own colregs as they go along.

I suppose you're referring to the discussions with those criminals like myself who would steer to port when they are the stand on vessel, to give way to ships.
I'm curious, what exactly do you think we (I mean, the common sense brigade) would have done in such situation?